From: Gordon Atkinson
To: mick.dawson@theharbourview.co.uk
Cc: George Mansbridge ; Ian Rutherford
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 12:34 PM
Subject: UK Docks [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
This email has been classified as: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Dear Mr Dawson
Further to our meeting yesterday, I have gone through the disc and found the TWDC report from 1996, and now attach a copy. The only reference to the dimensions are in the paragraph I have highlighted on page 1. The height is said to be ‘approximately 15.5 m high’-I accept that there is no reference to whether this is the inland end, or the riverside end, but when read in conjunction with the drawing (8296/1A) it must refer to the inland end. There is no reference in the report to the height (or indeed any other dimension) of the proposal having been amended in the period between submission and approval by the TWDC. There is a reference (highlighted) on p2 which refers to amended plans but I believe this can only be to 8296/4 which introduced the windows as it is in the context of photomontages illustrating a solid structure. I have also spoken to Jonathon Wilson who confirms that the dimensions of the proposal were not altered during the assessment of the proposal.
Regards
Gordon Atkinson
Planning Manager
I pointed out to the meeting that the drawing 8296/1A showed both ends of the shed to be 15.5m and it looks like Mr Atkinson is attempting to cover his back. When he says “When read in conjunction with the drawing (8296/1A) it must refer to the inland end” he could equally well have said that it must refer to the river end. The latter view has has been shown, to be the more plausible.
So it looks like someone at UK Docks was responsible for presenting the drawing 8296/1B (sloping sides) to Mr Cunningham in early September while the Agents Maughan Reynolds and Partners presented 8296/14 (drawn in August with vertical sides) to the Council in late September. It appears that Mr Cunningham showed the wrong drawing to the residents in November.